Portland Waterfront Rail Ops (Yard 8, Intermodal, etc)

1:32 into the WGME clip! Worth a look! HAHA!

MEC407 wrote: Video from WGME-13 (CBS): http://www.wgme.com/news/top-stories/st ... 5469.shtml

(The video from WGME has some footage of Mr. Fink speaking about the railroad's role in this project)

Did anyone else notice the model train picture they used in the first reference to PAR?

Pretty lazy journalism. Thats the reason I read the BDN and watch WABI...

gokeefe wrote:Well, pardon the pun, looks as if the "ship has sailed" on this thread! Thanks to those who PM'd me regarding this thread. I can now officially emerge from the last 24+ hours of self imposed seclusion (related to work/business).

My first impression is, "Wow!". Stunning frankly. Stunning to think of operating freight service to/from Europe (shades of the old Grand Trunk), stunning to think of intermodal rail in Portland (not even sure what that compares to...groundbreaking precedent in some ways perhaps), stunning to think of rail getting re-extended/rebuilt underneath the Casco Bay Bridge, stunning as well to think of Yard 8 becoming an "active" area again, more so than in the current LPG based situation.

All of it really is very surprising. Once again yet another reminder of the fact that Portland most certainly continues to have a true "working waterfront". As others have noted the potential for a service of this kind (in particular with its built in capacity for refrigerated transport) is really rather significant for a lot of different businesses in Portland. Finally, this proves the broader point about PAR yet again that the "Loads Wanted" sign has been hung out in Billerica (apparently it's in lights now as well...).

I just can't even begin to fathom some of the broader implications this has for industry in Southern Maine, especially if this service really does succeed. What an incredible win.

Timing is a careful piece of the strategy here. Notice Maine recently renovated the area. Also notice PAR's attitude towards new business as compared to prior. This is not the first proposed rail link to the terminal (Guilford was offered a deal many years ago) but the first that will be realized. All the key compenents are in place to make this service work.

CN9634 wrote:Did anyone else notice the model train picture they used in the first reference to PAR?

Yup. If I'm not mistaken, that model was actually painted by a RAILROAD.NET member.

"Pan Am 505" posted them here back when he did the models.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/panam505/3 ... hotostream

CN9634 wrote:

gokeefe wrote:Well, pardon the pun, looks as if the "ship has sailed" on this thread! Thanks to those who PM'd me regarding this thread. I can now officially emerge from the last 24+ hours of self imposed seclusion (related to work/business).

My first impression is, "Wow!". Stunning frankly. Stunning to think of operating freight service to/from Europe (shades of the old Grand Trunk), stunning to think of intermodal rail in Portland (not even sure what that compares to...groundbreaking precedent in some ways perhaps), stunning to think of rail getting re-extended/rebuilt underneath the Casco Bay Bridge, stunning as well to think of Yard 8 becoming an "active" area again, more so than in the current LPG based situation.

All of it really is very surprising. Once again yet another reminder of the fact that Portland most certainly continues to have a true "working waterfront". As others have noted the potential for a service of this kind (in particular with its built in capacity for refrigerated transport) is really rather significant for a lot of different businesses in Portland. Finally, this proves the broader point about PAR yet again that the "Loads Wanted" sign has been hung out in Billerica (apparently it's in lights now as well...).

I just can't even begin to fathom some of the broader implications this has for industry in Southern Maine, especially if this service really does succeed. What an incredible win.

Timing is a careful piece of the strategy here. Notice Maine recently renovated the area.

Indeed they did. But I am still more than a little surprised, especially since they have done lots of work elsewhere that hasn't panned out at all.

CN9634 wrote:Also notice PAR's attitude towards new business as compared to prior. This is not the first proposed rail link to the terminal (Guilford was offered a deal many years ago) but the first that will be realized. All the key compenents are in place to make this service work.

I'm assuming most important of all being the realization of real volumes of freight that are amenable to movement by rail.

Perhaps someone with better knowledge than I could answer a question for me; what currently is Maine exporting to Northern Europe? Pulp from Woodland, paper from AV Nackawic, lumber from Aroostook, frozen fish, wood pellets? Just trying to connect in my mind what is currently underserved that the opening of this "new" market for Maine goods to Europe will open up.

In terms of the impact of this deal on Pan Am, I think the tweet by Mr. Fink is telling- it'll be small for Pan Am, and, given the nature of international container transportation economics, will likely not lead to a game-changer over the long run. But, it's political in nature, trumpeting job creation and justifying public investment in the port.

It's gonna be tough for Pan Am to participate in a sizable share of this container traffic: it's small volume unevenly distributed due to the bi-monthly sailings with resulting connectivity challenges to/from the 4 potential Class 1 outlets, creating cost and service implications which will make it hard to compete with direct trucking or trucking to the railheads in Auburn, Ayer or Worcester.

Though it's exciting for and benefits Portland and Maine to some degree, it will not lead to Portland becoming a large, meaningful container port that will generate sizable rail volume moving forward. Large-scale International container transporation is driven by the economics of minimizing port calls to maximize ship productivity in concert with ports that minimize inland transportation costs by being closest to the largest (coastal and inland) consumption points. Unfortunately, this does not favor Portland and I don't see anything on the horizon that would change this, allowing Portland to break out of serving a small niche and generate sizable rail international container traffic.

QB 52.32 wrote:In terms of the impact of this deal on Pan Am, I think the tweet by Mr. Fink is telling- it'll be small for Pan Am, and, given the nature of international container transportation economics, will likely not lead to a game-changer over the long run. But, it's political in nature, trumpeting job creation and justifying public investment in the port.

It's gonna be tough for Pan Am to participate in a sizable share of this container traffic: it's small volume unevenly distributed due to the bi-monthly sailings with resulting connectivity challenges to/from the 4 potential Class 1 outlets, creating cost and service implications which will make it hard to compete with direct trucking or trucking to the railheads in Auburn, Ayer or Worcester.

Though it's exciting for and benefits Portland and Maine to some degree, it will not lead to Portland becoming a large, meaningful container port that will generate sizable rail volume moving forward. Large-scale International container transporation is driven by the economics of minimizing port calls to maximize ship productivity in concert with ports that minimize inland transportation costs by being closest to the largest (coastal and inland) consumption points. Unfortunately, this does not favor Portland and I don't see anything on the horizon that would change this, allowing Portland to break out of serving a small niche and generate sizable rail international container traffic.

Why would Pan Am participate if they thought it wouldn't bear any long-term results? Pan Am isn't run by politicians, it's run by $$. What do you think the investment opinion is for Eimskip? By this logic, your post doesn't make sense.

Give it time and it will either grow or flop.

With anything business, the only true certainty you have is that the sun will rise and set.

QB 52.32 wrote:In terms of the impact of this deal on Pan Am, I think the tweet by Mr. Fink is telling- it'll be small for Pan Am, and, given the nature of international container transportation economics, will likely not lead to a game-changer over the long run. But, it's political in nature, trumpeting job creation and justifying public investment in the port.

It's gonna be tough for Pan Am to participate in a sizable share of this container traffic: it's small volume unevenly distributed due to the bi-monthly sailings with resulting connectivity challenges to/from the 4 potential Class 1 outlets, creating cost and service implications which will make it hard to compete with direct trucking or trucking to the railheads in Auburn, Ayer or Worcester.

Though it's exciting for and benefits Portland and Maine to some degree, it will not lead to Portland becoming a large, meaningful container port that will generate sizable rail volume moving forward. Large-scale International container transporation is driven by the economics of minimizing port calls to maximize ship productivity in concert with ports that minimize inland transportation costs by being closest to the largest (coastal and inland) consumption points. Unfortunately, this does not favor Portland and I don't see anything on the horizon that would change this, allowing Portland to break out of serving a small niche and generate sizable rail international container traffic.

I'm not sure what connectivity challenges you mean - the containers have been sitting on the ship already for 1-2 weeks, taking another day or 2 to get to CSX, NS or the Canadian Class 1's isn't going to be a deal breaker. Fink would have had to be upfront with them on transit times to get this deal.

What does Auburn, Ayer or Worcester have to do with this at all?

How do you know where the goods are destined? Portland is about as close as you can get to the eastern population centers of Quebec. If they were going for areas much more to the south they would have never left Virginia or would have chosen a place in Southern New England.

I wonder what the ship transit time considerations are here too. I would guess that Portland is about 1 day closer to Europe than Virginia is. Could it be that even with a 1-2 day transit to New York that this is closer or break-even time wise to reach target markets? If that is true then they also gain 1-2 days round trip ocean time which opens up opportunity cost savings on their transport ships.

How long was MOAY/AYMO (to go all old school) running before the PAS/Patriot Corridor initiative took the data-gathering portion of that IM experiment to the next level? This may be another step in data-gathering to determine feasibility for additional IM expansion. If it doesn't prove promising, then it can be dropped with minimal loss of money and prestige.
If expansion does happen, it can reduce total transit time by reducing time afloat. Will Portland pose a threat to major east coast ports? Probably not, but it can provide an alternative. If D-1 continues to see improvements, the Portland experiment can also be used as spring-board for extension to Halifax, a definite saving in total transit time and an additional return on the D-1 investment.

CN9634 wrote:Why would Pan Am participate if they thought it wouldn't bear any long-term results? Pan Am isn't run by politicians, it's run by $$. What do you think the investment opinion is for Eimskip? By this logic, your post doesn't make sense.

Give it time and it will either grow or flop.

With anything business, the only true certainty you have is that the sun will rise and set.

Pan Am's "participation" is small in the near and mid- term, as described by Mr. Fink, hypothetical long-term (though driven by economics, no?), and, politically supportive now. Beyond the psychobabble and emotions, economics do provide objectivity in how to view a business and its prospects, and my post makes total sense. The impact of this deal on Pan Am is not necessarily correlated to the prospects of this deal for Eimskip, the port of Portland, or the citizens of Maine.

QB 52.32 wrote:

CN9634 wrote:Why would Pan Am participate if they thought it wouldn't bear any long-term results? Pan Am isn't run by politicians, it's run by $$. What do you think the investment opinion is for Eimskip? By this logic, your post doesn't make sense.

Give it time and it will either grow or flop.

With anything business, the only true certainty you have is that the sun will rise and set.

Pan Am's "participation" is small in the near and mid- term, as described by Mr. Fink, hypothetical long-term (though driven by economics, no?), and, politically supportive now. Beyond the psychobabble and emotions, economics do provide objectivity in how to view a business and its prospects, and my post makes total sense. The impact of this deal on Pan Am is not necessarily correlated to the prospects of this deal for Eimskip, the port of Portland, or the citizens of Maine.

The key driver of the industry is now intermodal. It has been for the past 10 years. This is Pan Am repositioning itself to capitalize on this. Economics give you an index from which you can base decisions, but economics can always be manipulated by a number of factors (Including ones these companies control). To limit your business activities to the domain of the current 'economics' would mean no one would ever take risks to get ahead. There is always uncertainty and based on managements risk profile, economics may or may not be a significant driver.

I wouldn't attempt to make a correlation between the impact of this deal on Pan Am and the prospects of this deal for Eimskip, the port of Portland or the citizens of Maine. I would say that there is moderate correlation between the success of this deal for Pan Am and Eimskip because Pan Am's position in the deal depends on Eimskip while Eimskip's doesn't nessecarily require Pan Am (But it is a greater advantage to them). Once again, this deal is an opportunity for Pan Am to reposition its current service offers to open more opportunities to different markets for its customers. Hypothetically speaking, you could shift midwest traffic destined for Europe that already travels through congested ports like Newark or Norfolk, up to Portland. Pan Am could also make a run for the Tropical traffic out of Saint John. Once the infrastructure is setup and is proven, then you can start to play the game.